Observational studyAdvances in therapy2015
Daptomycin in the Clinical Setting: 8-Year Experience with Gram-positive Bacterial Infections from the EU-CORE(SM) Registry.
Observational study in Advances in therapy, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 13 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
13 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Daptomycin to bone and joint infections and prosthesis joint infections: a systematic review.The Brazilian journal of infectious diseases : an official publication of the Brazilian Society of Infectious DiseasesPooled it
- Real-world daptomycin use across wide geographical regions: results from a pooled analysis of CORE and EU-CORE.Annals of clinical microbiology and antimicrobials · 2016Trial
- Comprehensive pharmacokinetic/pharmacodynamic analysis of commercially available premixed daptomycin preparations againstJAC-antimicrobial resistance · 2026Article
- Oritavancin Versus Daptomycin for Osteomyelitis Treatment After Surgical Debridement.Infectious diseases and therapy · 2024Article
- Article
- Calculated initial parenteral treatment of bacterial infections: Skin and soft tissue infections.GMS infectious diseases · 2020Article
- Linezolid versus daptomycin treatment for periprosthetic joint infections: a retrospective cohort study.Journal of orthopaedic surgery and research · 2019Article
- Dalbavancin Use in Vulnerable Patients Receiving Outpatient Parenteral Antibiotic Therapy for Invasive Gram-Positive Infections.Infectious diseases and therapy · 2019Article
- Article
- Acute Angioedema Triggered by Daptomycin.Infectious diseases and therapy · 2016Article
- MRSA: treating people with infection.BMJ clinical evidence · 2016Review
- Daptomycin: an evidence-based review of its role in the treatment of Gram-positive infections.Infection and drug resistance · 2016Review
- Efficacy and safety of daptomycin: systematic review and meta-analysis.Therapeutic advances in infectious diseaseArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionThe aim of this study was to evaluate the clinical outcomes and safety of daptomycin therapy in patients with serious Gram-positive infections.
methodsPatients were enrolled in the European Cubicin(®) Outcomes Registry and Experience (EU-CORE(SM)), a non-interventional, multicenter, observational registry. The real-world data were collected across 18 countries (Europe, Latin America, and Asia) for patients who had received at least one dose of daptomycin between January 2006 and April 2012. Two-year follow-up data were collected until 2014 for patients with endocarditis, intracardiac/intravascular device infection, osteomyelitis, or orthopedic device infection.
resultsA total of 6075 patients were enrolled. The most common primary infections were complicated skin and soft tissue infection (31.7%) and bacteremia (20.7%). Staphylococcus aureus was the most frequently reported pathogen (42.9%; methicillin-resistant S. aureus [MRSA], 23.2%), followed by Staphylococcus epidermidis and other coagulase-negative staphylococci (CoNS, 28.5%). The most commonly prescribed dose of daptomycin was 6 mg/kg/day (43.6%), and the median duration of therapy was 11 (range 1-300) days. Overall clinical success rate was 80.5%, and was similar whether daptomycin was used as first-line (82.9%) or second-line (79.2%) therapy. Clinical success rates were high in patients with S. aureus (83.9%; MRSA 83.0%) and CoNS (including S. epidermidis, 82.5%) infections. The majority of patients with endocarditis or intracardiac/intravascular device infection (86.7%) or osteomyelitis/orthopedic device infection (85.9%) had a sustained response during the 2-year follow-up period. There were no new or unexpected safety findings.
conclusionResults from real-world clinical experience showed that daptomycin is a valuable therapeutic option in the management of various difficult-to-treat Gram-positive infections.
fundingThis study was funded by Novartis Pharma AG.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.